http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/n ... man-rights

Part of me wants to laugh at the sheer brazenness of that

It does make it more realistic. When you have exercises they are impacted by the way the people react. I was looking at a video of an evacuation of an A380 aircraft where around 900 people escaped in 90 seconds. It was in near perfect conditions when everyone was expecting to evacuate. It would have been very different in a smoke filled cabin with people panicking and screaming, especially if there had been a crash landing with the odd broken limb. While it might have been irresponsible from the aspect of the villagers it might actually mean far fewer accidental fatalities during a real war.

True but you can't reliably simulate those sorts of conditions. The rules are all of the planes passangers must be evacuated, with half the cabin doors closed in ninety seconds.
If they could make the similations more realistic, then they'd need to up the time limit to reflect the change in test conditions.
Planes can be evacuated quickly too. Look at the footage of the Chine Airlines flight that caught fire after it landed. Everyone got off that quickly enough as there was no crash.

I agree it is something that cannot be simulated but the situation for the troops does depend on the civilian reactions. So what should be done is to observe those cases even more closely so that any lessons that can be learned will be learned. Many simulations that are mandated for safety reasons are not realistic but are as good as they can be. Also a lot of practice can make even a real incident like a drill to the crew having to deal with them.

I did read that someone tried to similate a real emergency by paying the people involved more money the more quickly they got out.
It was chaos in the cabin, lots of people git injured and the total evacuation time was much higher.
That test have nothing to do with any official tests though.

That might actually be a better way to make the tests more realistic. Peoples motivation will be a lot higher such as in a real accident. Though it might be interesting to compare what happened in the China Airlines fire case in terms of injury.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

But like I said, people were hurt doing the test. They can't to that as a standard.

Yes but it is a more realistic model. With good modelling techniques it only needs to be done the once, then the computers could adjust for the human factor. It might not be perfect but in certain situations it would be far more accurate. Then all they need to do is the standard test and then adjust with the computer model to assess the impact in real world situations. It could be irrelevant if the plane crashes away from the airport.